Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Adams v. Valley Nat. Bank of Ariz., 678 P.2d 525.

178 citing documents.

City of Phoenix v. Elgin Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (noting that we “prefer to decide each case upon its merits rather than to dismiss summarily on procedural grounds”).
Jaffe v. Capital One Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Jaffe v. Capital One Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
However, we “prefer to decide each case upon its merits rather than to dismiss summarily on procedural grounds,” Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., and exercise our 2Absent material revisions after the relevant dates, we cite the current version of the statutes and rules unless otherwise indicated.
Maestas v. nackard/scf Western Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Comm’n of Ariz., n.2, ¶ 6, n.2 (App. 2007); Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., 139 3 MAESTAS v. NACKARD/SCF WESTERN Decision of the Court Ariz. 340, 342, (“[C]ourts prefer to decide each case upon its merits rather than to dismiss summarily on procedural grounds.”).
National v. Bodine Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
National v. Bodine Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., -43, -28 (App. 1984).
Sandretto v. Payson Healthcare Management, Inc. 322 P.3d 168 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
Sandretto v. Payson Healthcare Management, Inc. 322 P.3d 168 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2014
See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (appellate court cannot assume duty of advocate and search voluminous records to support argument on appeal).
Tobias v. Hogle Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
Tobias v. Hogle Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2014
See Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., -43, -28 (App. 1984).
Delong v. Merrill 310 P.3d 39 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Delong v. Merrill 310 P.3d 39 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2013
Ass’n, (although debatable issue presented, addressing merits to clarify law); Nydam, 181 Ariz. at 101, 887 P.2d at 631 (confession of reversible error doctrine discretionary); Adams v. Valley Nat’l Bank of Ariz., (courts prefer to decide cases on their merits).
Tilley v. Delci 204 P.3d 1082 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
Tilley v. Delci 204 P.3d 1082 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2009
These are tasks which must be left to counsel.") (emphasis added); , ("We are not required to assume the duties of an advocate and search voluminous records and exhibits to substantiate an appellant’s claims.”); Gilbert v. Bd.
Lucille v. Dodge 5 P.3d 925 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
Lucille v. Dodge 5 P.3d 925 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2000
P. ("ARCAP”) 13(a)(6); , (court will not address issue party failed to develop on appeal).
Carondelet Health Services, Inc. v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System Administration 895 P.2d 133 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Carondelet Health Services, Inc. v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System Administration 895 P.2d 133 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Bird v. State Through Corbin 821 P.2d 287 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Bird v. State Through Corbin 821 P.2d 287 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Rule 25, Ariz.R.Civ.App.P.
Eardley v. Greenberg 774 P.2d 822 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Eardley v. Greenberg 774 P.2d 822 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Arizona Department of Revenue v. Navopache Electric Co-Op, Inc. 727 P.2d 813 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Arizona Department of Revenue v. Navopache Electric Co-Op, Inc. 727 P.2d 813 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1986
Jhagroo v. City of Phoenix 694 P.2d 1209 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Jhagroo v. City of Phoenix 694 P.2d 1209 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1984
Mast v. Standard Oil Co. of California 680 P.2d 137 Ariz. 1984
Mast v. Standard Oil Co. of California 680 P.2d 137 Ariz. 1984